ANALYSIS — During his first term and since, President Donald Trump has spoken positively of Russian leader Vladimir Putin. Now Trump’s policies are following suit.
In the wake of Friday’s Oval Office argument among Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodmyr Zelenskyy, Washington and the world are waking up to what that means. For one, Russia is acting as if it is now partnered with America.
“The new administration is rapidly changing all foreign policy configurations,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Russian state television on Sunday. “This largely aligns with our vision.”
While Friday’s ruckus came as a shock to many, it dramatized where things have been headed based on Trump’s statements and negotiating positions.
He has been looking for a deal to end the Ukraine-Russia war that favors Moscow, including: Russia keeping some Ukrainian territory it illegally occupies; opposition to NATO or other Western troops acting as security guarantees to uphold an armistice; blaming Zelenskyy, not Putin, for the invasion; allowing Russia to reopen diplomatic facilities — and the spies that go with them — on U.S. soil; and reportedly ceasing U.S. offensive cyber operations for as long as peace talks occur.
Meanwhile, Trump has publicly asked Russia for next to nothing in return, except for showing up to one meeting in Saudi Arabia to which neither Ukraine nor European allies were invited.
No guarantee?
Ukraine has little reason to agree to any deal along Trump’s lines, particularly without security guarantees against any potential future Russian aggression. And because the current situation represents an existential threat to their country, Ukrainians might have little choice but to continue to fight.
On Sunday, Zelenskyy seemed to confirm that, saying the end of the war is “very, very far away.”
That led Trump to respond Monday on social media: “This is the worst statement that could have been made by Zelenskyy, and America will not put up with it for much longer!”
Of particular concern to Ukraine and Western Europe is the prospect that the United States will stop arming Ukraine at the direction of Trump and his congressional allies.
That could mean no more deliveries of U.S. interceptors for Patriot air defenses or U.S.-made precision rockets and no more American logistical and intelligence support.
Trump adviser Elon Musk, the owner of SpaceX’s Starlink satellite network that Ukraine uses, could pull the plug, imperiling Ukrainian communications.
Trump could make it difficult for U.S. defense contractors to sell to Ukraine or Europe.
Any of this represents a turn away from Ukraine and European allies.
In his first term, Trump reportedly mulled pulling out of NATO, a prospect alarming enough to prompt Congress to insert language in the fiscal 2024 defense authorization bill to bar a president, any president, from unilaterally withdrawing from NATO without congressional approval.
European nations are already talking about spending billions of euros more than planned to arm Ukraine. Billions in Russian assets could be unfrozen to aid that cause.
If Europe has to help Ukraine without America, it will not be as effective as with America — but it will have to do, something the Europeans seem to be anticipating.
“Today, it became clear that the free world needs a new leader,” said Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s top diplomat, on Feb. 28.
Just the start?
The transatlantic tensions playing out over the Ukraine war are a microcosm of a larger problem that arises because of Trump’s de facto alliance with Putin and, more broadly, his negotiating style.
The next questions include, first, what else is Trump willing to cede to Putin? How long, for example, will the reported cessation of U.S. offensive cyber operations last and will it continue even if Russia does not reciprocate?
Moreover, although Trump’s security departments and agencies are largely led by China hawks, Trump could seek a deal with both Moscow and its ally, Beijing, if he sees the financial return as worth it.
Does any of this embolden China, North Korea and other potential aggressors?
Trump has sent mixed signals, for instance, about his willingness to back Taiwan if China were to invade the island.
Turnabout play
Recall that Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal after the Cold War ended in exchange for security guarantees from America and others.
Accordingly, if America does not take care of its allies, and even punishes them, can Washington expect to receive the intelligence from its partners that it needs amid a dizzying array of global threats?
Will Europe’s militaries step up next time to help America if it is attacked, as they did after the 9/11 terrorist strikes, when Ukrainians and others fought and died alongside Americans in Afghanistan?
If America’s nuclear arms umbrella, like other security commitments, is seen as something that could be negotiated away, might that lead some U.S. allies who are capable of going nuclear to do so?
Recall, too, that Ukraine is a democracy in the heart of Europe, and its borders were forcibly violated by an authoritarian neighbor.
If freedom and democracy are seen as mere rhetoric from Washington, not something it is willing to defend, what incentives do other countries have to ally with the U.S. at all?
The post Trump’s tilt toward Moscow raises global questions appeared first on Roll Call.
